Cases 11 - 20 of 98
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01629
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
LEWIS et al v. PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION
as 1:2015cv01328
Plaintiff:
ROGER JOSEPH WILLIS, ELY CHEN, GEORGE J. BARR and others
Defendant:
ESTATE OF NICHOLAS L. AMABILE, ESTATE OF DANIEL H. COURTNEY, ESTATE OF LAWRENCE D. OLBRIGHT and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 704 Labor Litigation
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv01569
Not Classified By Court:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329
MOORE v. U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
as 1:2019cv01718
Plaintiff:
MAURICE B. MOORE
Not Yet Classified:
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Defendant:
U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2019cv01373
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2019cv01009
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
TYREE v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC. et al
as 1:2019mc00038
Respondent:
SHELBY COUNTY, SHELBY COUNTY GENERAL SESSIONS, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE and others
Petitioner:
MAURICE TYREE
PARKER v. BOYLE et al
as 1:2018cv02436
Plaintiff:
MAURICE PARKER
Defendant:
TERRENCE W. BOYLE and BRYAN K. WELLS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NONPARTY SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM et al v. KOKO'S CONFECTIONARY & NOVELTY
as 1:2018mc00094
Plaintiff:
TOPS COMPANY INC
Defendant:
KOKO'S CONFECTIONARY & NOVELTY
Petitioner:
MAURICE U. CAHN and CAHN & SAMUELS LLP
In Re:
NONPARTY SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
IRVIN v. IRVIN
as 1:2018cv00948
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW IRVIN
Defendant:
TERRY MAURICE IRVIN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
